Facebook Live about talking to kids about staying safe from abuse with NSPCC

[RachelMumsnet]

We’re running a facebook live with NSPCC about talking to kids about staying safe from abuse. The NSPCC have developed programme called Speak out. Stay safe delivered in primary schools across the UK. Volunteers visit schools where they run workshops and assemblies to teach children how to stay safe from abuse and what to do if they have any concerns. The NSPCC are also running a campaign called PANTS that teaches parents how to talk to young children about staying safe from sexual abuse in an age appropriate and non-scary way.

Lidl say: "'Last year Lidl UK employees voted to make the NSPCC their new national charity partner for a three year period. During this period, this partnership will aim to raise £3 million to keep 1 million primary school children safe through the NSPCC’s Speak out. Stay safe programme. This vital programme helps to empower a generation of children with the knowledge they need to stay safe. With at least 2 children in the average primary school class having suffered abuse or neglect, it’s vital that the NSPCC has the resources to visit primary schools across the UK to teach children that abuse is never OK."

Join the NSPCC live next week on Thursday 30 August at 12.30pm on Mumsnet Facebook or post up a question on this thread that we will put to the NSPCC during the live stream. We’ll link to the stream next week on this thread.

It's quite straightforward really. Many of us have children. Many of our children have friends who are boys/girls/whatever (who cares) and we are all happy for them to be friends and to share experiences.

But when they get to being teenagers, things change. No matter how much they have been friends from the time they were toddlers, we (as parents) look at a group of 14 year olds (some capable of making sperm and the others capable of becoming pregnant) and make the decision that they are better in separate rooms. Why do we do this? Is it because they don't share interests such as putting on makeup or comparing footballs scores? Obviously not. Is it because of different sizes/strength/maturity? Probably not, they've been friends since they were 3, we like them all, we don't consider any of them a danger.

Could it possibly be because [siob] one of them might get pregnant?

How many of us have happily let all our (primary school age) children bed down together in tents/holiday cottages etc etc, but when they get to secondary age say "hang on a sex, they are 13/14/15 now, we need to put up a few boundaries"?

If we, as untrained parents, can see the problem, why the fuck can no statutory bodies/children's charities/schools/youth groups etc etc?

I don't believe they can't see it. I simply don't.

Obviously there are more issues with opposite sex adults/stranger danger/pressures on girls etc etc.

But the above scenario - boys and girls we like and trust, who have known each other all their lives, we still separate them - for reasons of privacy, comfort and above all safety.

If we as parents separate our children and our friends' children, and our children's friends by sex for reasons of safely, why the fuck are we expected to allow others to decide this isn't necessary?

I love it when people assume deleted messages are for "hate" or "abuse" when mostly they are very simply for resusing to use NewSpeak or for pointing out truths that other people don't like to see

Yes, exactly.

DS is getting towards that age - still a child, definitely pre-pubescent at the mo, but some of his female friends are starting to go through puberty.

Last time he had a sleep over with a female friend, I made sure I checked with the other mum and with both children (because they're starting to want privacy) that they were okay with sharing a room. A year or so from now, they won't get a choice, girls will be in one room, boys in another.

Exactly. Up from 12 to 17 (legal age here) I wouldn't let girls and boys share in my house, under my supervision. Now mine are young adults (over 19, all of them) I don't care if girls and boys want to sleep together; after all, if they were going to have sex they would have done so by now.

But I still offer separate rooms if they are sleeping here because I remember as a teenager being pressured to go further than I wanted to. So far when there have been big gangs here, the girls have always preferred to sleep separately - as is their right! ds (and his friends) get kicked out to sleep on mattresses in the living room.

I'm not sure if this has been posted already (still catching up)

But, the NSPCC website says that the NSPCC themselves "do not advise that children of the opposite sex over the age of 10 share a room"

Why is that, I wonder? Surely if one changes their gender identity it's fine and therefore not a safeguarding or overcrowding problem at all? Or is SEX important after all?

www.nspcc.org.uk/preventing-abuse/child-protection-system/legal-definition-child-rights-law/bedroom-sharing-moving-out/

I would strongly suspect The Sunday Times or Mail on Sunday will have picked this up.

Yes - gender is the magic word. It has nothing to do with sex. What's in your pants is private blah blah blah

All safeguarding worries vanish in a puff of illogic.

Does the NSPCC maybe not understand sex v gender?

Maybe they think sex = lust (bad) and gender = feelings, unicorns, no suicides(good)?

My early teen kid's at a sleepover tonight with some female friends and one male friend who is gay. Who's also sleeping in a separate room whilst the girls all bed down. I phoned the parent to check. Cos I'm not a fucking idiot and wanted to make sure the other parent isn't either.

If I understand the NSPCC statement correctly, they see no safeguarding issues with 12 year old girls showering changing and sleeping in the same spaces as 18 year old males.

Go home NSPCC, you're drunk.

They should be experts but they're not.

Of course the concerning thing is that to all intents and purposes, the general public think they will be experts.

That's me.

I genuinely thought the NSPCC were child sexual abuse experts. Wise to all the gaslighting, the red flags, patterns, etc.

Reassuring cynical, unflappable and grounded.

I know fuck all about csa, but it appears that it's still more than them.

My early teen kid's at a sleepover tonight with some female friends and one male friend who is gay. Who's also sleeping in a separate room whilst the girls all bed down. I phoned the parent to check. Cos I'm not a fucking idiot and wanted to make sure the other parent isn't either.

Good move to check. I once refused to have a ‘gay boy’ sleep over at an all girls sleepover. Some other parents thought I was ‘mean’ one thought I was homophobic and said how did I know none of the girls were lesbians? I said I didn’t but if they were I didn’t think it would result in pregnancy. The parents who backed me to the hilt were the lesbian couple. This was a few years ago, thanks to this board I now know exactly why the Lesbians backed me.

PS he’s no longer gay.

Good move to check. I once refused to have a ‘gay boy’ sleep over at an all girls sleepover. Some other parents thought I was ‘mean’ one thought I was homophobic and said how did I know none of the girls were lesbians?

It's funny how we expect kids to be so sure about things that adults struggle with for decades at times. How many gay men or lesbian women have slept with or dated members of the opposite sex. Hell some even remain married for years.

Why trans youngsters are made out to be so sure and so safe about things that adults genuinely have struggled with at times I don't know.

I find it strange that the NSPCC expected to control a question and answer session, or steer the session onto the subject that the NSPCC wanted to promote.

Perhaps they've confused question and answer sessions with PR or marketing?

Soooo....that went well

What a fucking embarrassment

Well.....

1. I hope this is all over the papers tomorrow - have people sent it to news desks?

1. The power of Mumsnet is there in so many intelligent and well thought through posts

1. I am seriously confused... what a lame statement for NSPCC to put out. There are intelligent people who work there - I have known some in the past. Surely they get that they need to invest time and energy and thought into getting to grips with this one issue and to understand it inside out ... and yes, stop nodding and start thinking....

I so agree:
If one organisation, just one, especially one with as much clout as the NSPCC, has the courage to openly say 'this is a safeguarding issue; trans girls are still boys and trans boys are still girls and they all need protecting according to their sex', all the other charities would follow suit. They would. It just takes one statutory body to pull the first card.

They must realise

1. they owe it to the children to get this right
2. this is a fundraising disaster for them... so many of us go to or organise NSPCC fundraisers - and will no longer - as well as rapidly sharing the content of this thread with those that haven't seen it....

Surely they cant go on burying their head in the sand?

Is anyone able to archive the Childline videos, so it’s evidenced that an organisation trusted by impressionable children and teens presented puberty blockers as no big deal in case they ever try and claim no such content existed.

Disappointed with th NSPCC. Not what I expected at all.

One thing to bear in mind is the NSPCC have STATUTORY powers, unique amongst charities, they are a quasi public body.

This means, along with local authorities, they have the POWER to remove your kids!

People think this is similar to the RSPCA, it isn't, RSPCA has no legal right to enter homes, or seize animals (which is why they were investigated by the Government and the charity commission, for trespass and doing things they had no right to do, like the Sally Army in their pseudo official uniforms) and any prosecution they bring is private.

The NSPCC on the other hand are empowered by the state to remove children. This means they have a) huge amounts of power and b) a massive responsibility to be accountable.

I agree they're not as expert as they think they are but they are perceived to be. They have a duty to get this right.

I mean, what next? Them meddling in families where parents don't agree that their erstwhile shy, camp son is a girl?

Perhaps they've confused question and answer sessions with PR or marketing?

That's exactly it. They wanted cosy and they got a bit of challenge.

I mean, what next? Them meddling in families where parents don't agree that their erstwhile shy, camp son is a girl?

Given the Scottish guidance is that social services are a phone calll away if you don't affirm your child's transition, then I'd say yes.

Especially if the NSPCC are being advised that doubling down is the only effective strategy. Fear, intimidation and silencing being the favoured tactics of trans lobby groups.

I had no idea the NSPCC had any kind of statutory power at all. Just that they were a benign, well established, altruistic organisation.

No wonder they have the impression that they're Teflon. That they can put out a wanky statement that bears no scrutiny whatsoever. And what, parents will just roll over?

Where are all the grown ups in this mess? More and more I feel like these organisations are run by sixth formers.

Datun, it's quite scary.

They are governed by Royal Charter, and they are a registered charity. But they get public funds and yes have statutory powers. They also have a huge income.

Maybe this is why TRAs are so keen to influence them?

This is why I'd like to see their Equality Impact Assessments. They are not legally obliged as a charity to produce them, but as a quasi public body I'd say they are morally and ethically obliged.

Maybe this is why TRAs are so keen to influence them?

Oh fuck...

Given the Scottish guidance is that social services are a phone calll away if you don't affirm your child's transition, then I'd say yes

Background to screenshot:
Tara Hewitt is one of the co-founders of TELI (Trans Equality Legal initiative) along with Jess Bradley and Michelle Brewer (lawyer):
relevent threads re TELI influence:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3325882-WEP-conference-questions-for-panel-of-trans-rights-advocating-barristers
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3325623-Jess-Bradley-a-government-advisor-on-womens-rights-suspended-by-NUS-over-indecent-blog-Part-iii

Tara Hewitt also an influential NHS diversity adviser / consultant (Manchester/NW)

Adviser for the Trans Toolkit and resources for Social Care Professionals and foster carers.
(see op for concerns raised by social workers, Jessicca Eaton, DrEM):
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3324578-Vunerabilities-of-Looked-After-Children-Social-Work-CP-restricted-by-affirmation-requirement-Trans-Youth-in-Care-Toolkit

She has been, with some prominant Mermaids supporters & TRAs, increasingly openly critical of the GIDS / Dr Polly Carmichael approach recently.

Recent